Talk:Lathe of Heaven (film)

	Speculative fiction portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Science Fiction, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of science fiction on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Science FictionWikipedia:WikiProject Science FictionTemplate:WikiProject Science Fictionscience fiction
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Television Low‑importance

	Television portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Television, a collaborative effort to develop and improve Wikipedia articles about television programs. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page where you can join the discussion. To improve this article, please refer to the style guidelines for the type of work.TelevisionWikipedia:WikiProject TelevisionTemplate:WikiProject Televisiontelevision
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Film: American

	Film portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Film. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see lists of open tasks and regional and topical task forces. To use this banner, please refer to the documentation. To improve this article, please refer to the guidelines.FilmWikipedia:WikiProject FilmTemplate:WikiProject Filmfilm
	This article is supported by the American cinema task force.

Do not delete

Nothing is gained by removing it. I can't add any details because I've never seen it. But even as it is, it does a job.--GwydionM (talk) 17:07, 6 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

In future, just take off the prod notice! There is significant coverage, see http://news.google.co.uk/archivesearch?um=1&ned=uk&hl=en&q=%22Lathe+of+Heaven%22+%22james+caan%22&cf=all. Fences&Windows 20:28, 9 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Definitely a remake?

Is it definitely a remake of the 1980 version? Just because it's based on the same source, doesn't automatically make it a remake. 87.244.106.227 (talk) 18:21, 26 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

It looks like reliable sources apply the term "remake" to this, so it is probably fine as it is. I think the term is supposed to be loosely applied. The initial film adaptation was made in 1980, and they repeated the adaptation process (remade). The term just indicates that it is not the first time an adaptation has been done. Erik (talk | contrib) ^{(ping me)} 18:34, 26 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Lathe of Heaven (film). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090102142609/http://www.dvdverdict.com/reviews/latheheaven.php to http://www.dvdverdict.com/reviews/latheheaven.php

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 02:30, 26 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Plot should be removed or replaced

This would be better served by having the Plot section replaced with a short synopsis and recategorized as a stub. The current Plot section basically just recapitulates the first 5-10 minutes in way too much detail and abruptly ends. The wording makes it terribly unclear this is what is happening, and a gross error occurs when it states that his lawyer sends him to see a psychiatrist. It's the judge. Also, it's far from obvious that it's a futuristic society. I'm a bit surprised that it won an award and suspect an argument could be made that its notability doesn't warrant its own article, but it would be better to remove what doesn't work and let someone have a crack at it then leave such a shoddy plot summary in place. 47.36.18.210 (talk) 22:44, 13 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

WP:SOFIXIT? DonIago (talk) 02:31, 14 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]